|
|
|
 |
 |
|||
|
|
The 52nd anniversary of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) falls on September 2, 2003 By Prof. W. A. Wiswa Warnapala The formation of
the Sri Lanka Freedom Party in September, 1951 was a major landmark in the
political history of Sri Lanka and this could be attributed to a large
variety of political and social factors which subsequently made a
significant impact on the processes of change in the period after
independence, and it was in the stage of the post-colonial State that most
of the vital political and economic changes came to be registered due to
the leadership of the SLFP as the party which successfully mobilised the
rural masses for equality and social justice. With its massive commitment
to the emancipation of the rural poor and the oppressed, the Sri Lanka
Freedom Party, as the major vehicle of political and social change, laid
the foundation for a period of change which as its versatile architect, S.
W. R. D. Bandaranaike described, became the period of transition. It was
to this period of transition to which he remained truly committed from the
very inception of his political career which he launched at Kalagedihena
with his maiden popular political speech in which he briefly spelled out
his strategy for political change in this country. Though S. W. R. D.
Bandaranaike came from the highest social elite of the country, he was
able to identify himself with the people in an astonishing way; the
liberal political ideas which he imbibed as a student helped him to
immediately identify himself with the aspirations of the masses, and the
speech which he delivered in March, 1925 amply demonstrated his desire to
work for the benefit of the common man. Within a year after his arrival
from Oxford from where he was able to assess the nature of the nationalist
struggle against imperialism, Bandaranaike, though young in age, formed a
political party called the Progressive Nationalist Party. This party,
calling itself progressive and nationalist, placed a programme which, for
the first time in the history of Sri Lanka, advocated devolution of power
as a form of strengthening representative democratic institutions in the
country. He, as an admirer of the ancient system of local government
institutions of the country, saw the need to modernise those institutions
in order to expand the basis of popular constitutional government, and he,
when the opportunity came, took several steps to modernise and transform
the local government structure of this country. Though he came to be
associated with the main political organisation of the period, the Ceylon
National Congress whose elitist and reformist strategies remained
unacceptable to him, he formed his own political organisation, the Sinhala
Maha Sabha, which, in fact, was the precursor to the SLFP, in order to
place his own ideas on politics of the country before the people, and this
organisation, which was formed in 1934, indirectly inherited certain
aspects of the agitation campaign of Anagarika Dharmapala whose death
occurred in 1933. The formation of the Sinhala Maha Sabha and its platform
on national issues showed some relationship, though not overt, to the
articulation of ideas of Anagarika Dharmapala. It was this association and
the link which ultimately paved the way for the historic political change
of 1956 which, undoubtedly, received some impetus from the historical
antecedents of the early nationalist struggles and it, therefore,
represented a watershed in the political history of Sri Lanka. The Sri
Lanka Freedom Party which came to be formed as a social democratic
alternative, derived inspiration from the forces which, through the
limited agitational campaigns of the Sinhala Maha Sabha, came on the
political scene of the country. It was during this period that the country
witnessed a polarisation of forces between the conservative politics
represented by the UNP and the socialist politics championed by the
Marxist Parties, though splintered into several segments based on
ideological considerations, constituted a force with both mass and
parliamentary support. On the basis of the agitation of the earlier period
for both political and social emancipation, though it had a limited
religious fervour, an alternative leadership opposed to the English
educated elite which dominated the political and social life of the
country was emerging and it was this emerging rural elite, whose
aspirations and rights, remained suppressed for years due to colonial
domination, was looking for a political leadership that is capable of
mobilising their support to bring about a transformation in the politics
of the country. This alternative leadership, comprising primarily of the
rural elite whose traditional power bases remained intact, was looking for
a political party which has the capacity to articulate their political and
economic demands, including their social and cultural aspirations which,
with the death of Anagarika Dharmapala in 1933 got stultified for
sometime. Bandaranaike, with his vision, saw the need to fill the vacuum
with the formation of the SLFP in 1951 and it appealed to a political base
that derived strength from the traditional rural elite which, in fact, was
the emerging leadership in opposition to the propertied classes and the
English educated elite. Bandaranaike, through the Sinhala Maha Sabha
which, as he stated, was formed to ‘unite the Sinhalese and to work in
cooperation with the other communities’, cultivated the varied elements
within the rural elite with a view to mobilising them on a formidable
scale to ensure an election victory. It was in this political scenario
that Bandaranaike mobilised the five major pressure groups- the Sangha,
Ayurvedic physicians, teachers, farmers and workers- who at the eve of the
1956 general election, formed themselves into a formidable political
phenomenon called ‘Pancha Maha Balavegaya’ which, apart from its
crucial role in the elections, provided an extra-impetus to the
formulation of public policy. In this case, these formidable pressure
groups, which were instrumental in the political change of l956,
indirectly influenced public policy formulation, and the over-emphasis of
their interests led to policies which had dysfunctional consequences and
it became an inevitable development which had to be later arrested with
different public policy postures. On the other hand, the construction of
public policy with a nationalist tinge was a manifest feature of all
countries in the first decade after independence. It was from this
political resource from which both people and politicians derived
legitimacy. In fact, such policies were necessary to legitimise themselves
in power and they, at the same time, were expected to placate the demands
of the nationalist interests. A democratic government does not come into
existence merely because of an elected legislature; methods have to be
devised to associate people with the government at all levels and this
could be achieved by introducing policies affecting their interests and
aspirations. The Sri Lanka Freedom
Party, which came to be launched as a middle of the road social democratic
alternative party, was from its inception, was expected to steer clear of
the two political ideologies in the international arena. A tilt towards
the socialist principles was inevitably there and the policies and
strategies, based on the indigenous Sri Lankan political culture, the main
resource of which is the Buddhist Sinhalese tradition, had to be framed
with a view to showing that this was a political party committed to social
democratic ideas. It never wanted to align itself with extreme positions
based on international ideological perspectives. Major content of
Bandaranaike’s view of social democracy was the creation of
opportunities for the common man, and in essence it is the kind of life it
opens up for the ordinary citizen. Bandaranaike, writing an introduction
to the first Manifesto of the party which was issued in 1951, stated that
‘there has arisen an urgent need and growing demand for such a party as
we have now formed’. He, further stated that ‘economically, it
believes that policy must be formed on the needs of the common man. In our
country where the vast majority of the people are living in poverty and
problems of unemployment and serious under-employment are growing in
gravity, the approach to these problems on socialist principles is the
only effective method for their satisfactory solution.’ The party,
therefore, from its very inception, championed the cause of the common man
whose problems it advocated, could only be solved by the adoption of the
policies based on the social democratic principles, and this posture of
the SLFP, as subsequent events rightly demonstrated, paved the way for
coalitions with the parties of the traditional Left of the country. The
aspirations of the common man, therefore, come to dominate the policy
agenda of the party in the subsequent years and the SLFP, as all political
parties in the countries emerged out of colonial rule, took manifest steps
to bring about fundamental political and social changes based on the
perceptions of the common man. It, from its very inception, laid the
foundation for the age of the common man which dominated the political
line of the party in the last fifty years, and it from this vital
political base that it still derives strength and sustainability as the
major political force in this country. Bandaranaike, throughout his
political career, displayed immense sympathy with the needs and
aspirations of the common who, irrespective of the difference of race,
creed and caste, became the central factor influencing the formulation of
public policy. Marxists dubbed this as generation of mass pressure. This
kind of approach was taken because in the 19th century and quite late into
the 20th century, the State and community came to be identified with
classes which enjoyed political and economic power generally based on land
and this was the pattern in most countries which emerged out of
colonialism. Bandaranaike, through the SLFP, saw this as a major source of
inequality and injustice in society and it was he who organised the people
to smash it through a set of policies, the main content of which was based
on the grievances of the common man. The 1951 Manifesto of the
SLFP, which included perceptions of social democratic policies of the SLFP,
stated that ‘the party believes that our people can achieve the stature
of a truly free people only if the principles just mentioned go hand in
hand with our revival of cultural and the use of our national languages
and the revival and stimulation of the spiritual values, so that religion
once again attains its rightful place as a vital force in the lives of our
people.’ This statement in the 1951 Manifesto clearly demonstrates that
the party took into consideration the major factors affecting the
political culture of Sri Lanka; in other words culture and religion which
was suppressed during the entire period of colonial rule, needed to be
revitalised in order to awaken and mobilise the people for wider
democratic change and the very utilisation of such factors was inevitable
as the political culture of the country came to be intertwined with them.
They were useful instruments of mass mobilisation in a backward polity.
Paul Baran once stated that ‘economic development has always been
propelled by classes and groups interested in a new economic and social
order’, and in Sri Lanka, economic development and social change during
this period came to be propelled by the underprivileged peasants in the
rural sector and the workers in the urban sector. The forces that stood in
the way of economic progress were mainly the dominants pro-imperialist
elements who had a control over the commanding heights of the economy and
the SLFP, with a set of economic and social policies, took measures to
weaken such forces. Discussing the aims of
the party, the manifesto stated that the SLFP would strive to achieve a
social democratic society through a Government dependent on the widest
possible participation of the people. Though it did not say that the aim
was to build a participatory democracy, the SLFP, during the regimes of
Bandaranaikes, brought the common man into the arena of government, and
the true impact of universal franchise came to be felt among the masses
only with the formation of the SLFP as it activated the down-trodden rural
people into political action and in the end, the rural voter became the
major arbiter in politics. It was this particular feature, while fostering
a political culture unique to Sri Lanka, which came to be registered as a
distinct element in the formulation of public policy and no government
whatever its coloration, could ignore the rural peasantry and its powerful
elite in the introduction of public policies with an emphasis on social
welfare and economic benefits for the rural sector. Major policy changes
took place in response to the interests of the rural peasantry which,
amidst discontentment, remained the vital political base of the SLFP.
Bandaranaike, understanding the political potentiality of the rural
peasantry, whose vital pressure groups were cultivated by him from his
earliest political career, constructed a set of policies with a view to
mobilising them as the main agents of political and social change. Making
use of the historical foundations and traditional loyalties, the SLFP in
contrast with the Marxist parties which struggled to emerged as the
alternative from the mid-thirties, appealed to the rural masses through a
set of social democratic policies whose basic aims, as spelled out in the
1951 manifesto, was as follows: (1) to repair the
material, moral and spiritual damage inflicted on the nation through years
of subjection. This has a direct relationship to the spiritual renaissance
which Anagarika Dharmapala advocated till 1933, and it further proves the
fact that the movement spearheaded by Anagarika had an impact on the
momentous changes to which the SLFP provided leadership in 1956. In any
democratic society, as A. V. Dicey pointed out in his work, Legislation
and Public Opinion in England, any piece of legislation in any important
period derived inspiration from the ideas fought out in the country before
it came up for legislation. (2) to secure amongst the
citizens of the country a fair distribution of income and equality of
opportunity. Various measures were taken by respective SLFP governments to
bring about redistributive justice and the extension of social welfare
with the construction of an impressive social welfare edifice, the
beginnings of which began in the early thirties and it provided an impetus
to the growth and development of a strong human resource base. Impulses
for such changes were provided by the rural masses and the working classes
whose grievances found a platform within the ranks of the SLFP. (3) Heath and food
production and the conservation of national resources of the country found
a prominent place. Major policies, including nationalisation which became
an instrument of development, came within this area and such policy
changes, influenced by the international scenario then prevalent came to
be guided by the need for State intervention to bring about development.
It was beyond dispute that the main burden of economic development or
capital accumulation had to be borne by the State. This was an inevitable
role and responsibility assigned to the Sri lankan State. All emergent
countries of the period, guided by a similar economic philosophy, followed
such policies as they were necessary to eliminate social and economic
inequalities among the people. In the today’s perception, such policies
are treated as retrogressive but the content in which they were
introduced, specially those policies which expanded the role of the State
in the economic and social life of the nation, were unavoidable as they
were integrally linked with the aspirations of a new State. It was this
process of change which K. M. Pannikkar saw as the first priority and the
responsibility of the new independent State; it was the SLFP which,
through its policies, gave expression to this major responsibility of the
new State. The regimes for the SLFP, through a large variety of social and
economic programmes accelerated the process of political modernisation; it
became a major vehicle of social, economic and political transformation. (4) Yet another objective
was to spread education amongst all the population through the medium of
their own languages. Vast strides in education, especially in secondary
and tertiary education, were taken in response to the aspirations of the
vast majority of the rural people and it improved social mobility, which
indirectly affected, the process of political mobilisation in the country.
The take over of the assisted schools by Sirimavo Government, amidst
opposition from the reactionary forced, paved the way for the development
of a national system of eduction, which came to be reformed through a
series of reforms culminating in the introduction of reforms by the 1994
PA Government to re-orient education in order to me the challenges of the
21st century. The expansion of University education, the initial impetus
for which came with the conversion of the ancient centres of learning into
universities — Vidyodaya and Vidyalankara smashed the backbone of the
privileged English educated and opened the doors for the rural youth to
aspire to higher positions in society. This kind of expansion of the
intellectual community signalled a vast process of change, the impact of
which still persists in the Sri Lankan society. (5) Another major policy
standpoint of the SLFP at 1951 was the development of democratic
institutions in the country. As far back as 1926, S. W. R. D. Babdaranaike
advocated a form of political democracy and he recommended the Swiss model
for a very brief period; what inspired him was the political democracy in
a small State on which he had a number of philosophical ideas, and some,
subsequently, came to be reflected in the foreign policy postures of the
SLFP. The devolution of power, which Bandaranaike advocated as a form of
political democracy, came to be reflected in the famous
Babdaranaike-Chelvanayakam Pact which he signed in 1957 and the failure to
implement these proposals as a part of a political solution to the ethnic
question resulted in disastrous consequences. Nobody can deny the fact
that it was this political party, with Bandaranaike as its architect and
Sirimavo as its creative implementor, which took the Sri Lankan foreign
policy to the international arena and it became a major instrument of
leverage in all major areas of State activity. The policy of
non-alignment, though it has limited objectives in a globalised world,
paid dividends for Sri Lanka during its early emergent period and this
policy became a major instrument of political resource mobilisation. (6) In the sphere of
constitutional change, the SLFP, from its very inception had its own
agenda, the aim of which was the introduction of an autochthonous
Constitution. In 1951, the party manifesto stated that ‘we shall adopt a
Constitution which will define and guarantee. (a) equality before the
law of all persons (b) equal rights for all citizens (c) freedom of speech
and freedom from arrest without due process of law (d) freedom of worship
and (e) freedom of social serfdom. Bandaranaike, within a
year of the formation of the SLFP, stated in 1952 that ‘the only choice
for the mankind in a changing world is between capitalism and communism is
not correct. There is a further alternative which is perhaps the real
solution to the problems of today. There is a middle way, a
third force, which is not something negative, but something that is very
positive, and one whose message can be given to the world particularly by
Asia. It has three main ingredients: political, economic and cultural’.
Bandaranaike, rather prophetically saw the emergence of a middle path of
governance and development, and stated that the SLFP is a party which
symbolises this third force a form of social democracy where both
democracy and social justice prevail. Throughout the history of the SLFP,
it gave leadership to the progressive forces of the country to bring about
progressive changes, and the changes in 1956 represented a belated
national liberation movement with progressive advances and retreats. It was a coalition which
reached out in the direction of the left centre due to the active
participation of the left wing parties in these coalition arrangements and
the SLFP, as their leader and the main force, transformed the character of
the Sri Lankan State. The United Front of 1956, the MEP was a bold united
front of 1956, the MEP was a bold united front with a very radical
programme which brought certain vital changes in the crucial sectors of
the economy and the country made substantial advance towards progress. It
was the MEP, with its enthronement of the common man as the chief arbiter
in the political conflict, which dislodged the colonial elite whose
downfall was symbolised in the concept of the ‘Ape Aanduwa’ (Our
Government) with which the ordinary man, who humbled the rich and
powerful, tasted political power for the first time, and they never wanted
to abdicate that power thereafter. As stated above,
Bandaranaike expanded his theory on the middle path which he exhorted
during the course of the 1956 Coalition as well. He stated that the SLFP
is a middle party and as such exposed to criticism by both extremes. It was clear from such
assertions that Bandaranaike, deriving inspiration from the middle path in
the Buddhist tradition, was keen in building a party that is capable of
articulating policies which do not fall within the purview of two
categories of political thinking in the world at that time. This amply
demonstrated that the SLFP, from the beginning, emerged as a social
democratic party which had an unique link with the Sri Lankan tradition
and history. Long before Gorbachev
launched the perestroika, it was Bandaranaike saw the division of the
world community into two opposing camps and it determined the world events
which had negative consequences. Bandaranaike wanted a
viable third route along which democracy, social justice and development
could be achieved. It was a realistic assessment of world events that
unfolded later, and therefore every country was called upon to re-examine
not only of the problems confronting a country but a re-thinking of all
relations both national and international. The process of world
development, culminating in the existing globalisation, has given the
countries like Sri Lanka the opportunity to decide on priorities instead
of remaining deeply rooted in dogmas and ideologies which do not permit a
country to pursue a realistic policy. It was Bandaranaike and the SLFP
which demonstrated a remarkable resiliency in adjusting itself to
situations and policy perspectives, and he taught the people of this
country, through the SLFP, that people should renounce stereotype
ideological thinking and adjust themselves realistically to world
developments; this is still valid in the given context in Sri Lanka. The 1970 United Front,
which registered yet another massive election victory under the main
leadership of the SLFP, represented a further advance in the direction of
dismantling the Capitalist State and its colonial legacy, and its common
programme, consisting of radical policies, wanted certain fundamental
changes implemented to transform the economy, and they were reflected in
agriculture, industry, finance and trade. Such policies helped the local
entrepreneur classes and it was in association with the SLFP policy on
local industries that the local industrial class began to emerge and they
were provided with various incentives to establish industries. Private investment was
give considerable importance and the State was to foster this process.
Land reform legislation and the take over of plantations, including the
agrarian laws which included the historic Paddy Lands Act, all these
represented vital changes adopted to rectify certain injustices; this, in
particular, applied to the oppressed Kandyan peasantry. The Principles of
State Policy, incorporated in the 1972 Constitution, went well beyond the
common programme of 1970 and masses came to enjoy various economic and
political benefits. The SLFP, therefore, with
its associations with the progressive forces in the traditional left
parties, made tremendous contribution to the advancement of the country.
It was not the same situation in 1994 as the PA came to power after long
lapse of period within which several policies have been reversed and a new
political culture based on political violence has been created, the 1994
coalition itself was very loose and fluid and it, with its razor thin
majority in parliament, succeeded in establishing law and order, political
democracy, human rights, elimination of terror and violence. It successfully
functioned as a regime of change due to the astuteness of its leader, Mrs.
Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga who displayed a commendable capacity in
the management of the 1994 Peoples Alliance Coalition led by the SLFP for
six years. The SLFP, therefore, was compelled to make policy adjustments
to break-away from the State centred policies in the context of the
emerging global economic scenario where private enterprise came to be
recognise as the engine of growth. The whole process of change was based
on the need to recognise human values. Nearly 17 years of UNP rule had
reversed the process of change began in 1956 and the country, during the
said period, became a lawless state which is ungovernable. It was this
character of the Sri Lankan state which underwent a change under the
leadership of President Kumaratunga. The recognition of
pluralism and the extended posture of the party towards interests and
aspirations of the minorities signalled a shift in major national policy
which, at successive elections, paid dividends but it suffered due to the
intransigence of certain political forces. The SLFP, as a political party,
which historically made pragmatic adjustments to the issues of the day,
made relevant and realistic adjustments with the view to maintaining the
stability and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. The SLFP, though the
current situation demands certain adjustments in its policy posyures in
relation to minorities, cannot totally break-away from its distinct mass
base in order to accommodate unreasonable demands of groups who champion
the cause of minorities; the party, while making reasonable and acceptable
adjustments, cannot play a role which would threaten the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Sri Lanka and thereby jeopardise the basic
interests of the party. It is my view that party,
while making adjustments, must remain loyal to its major historical
foundations. It needs to chart its own course, taking into consideration
both national and international development which impinge on its major
policy platforms, in such a way so as to see that it does not deviate from
its popularly accepted historical foundations which still show relevance
and validity. Those historical foundations, on which the party was built
nearly fifty two years ago, are still important factors in the Sri Lankan
society. This, however, does not mean that pragmatic adjustments on vital
issues are totally impossible, and this is the challenge that the party is
confronted with in the context of a globalised world. The SLFP, which
successfully withstood all attempts at disruption on a number of
occasions, has the capacity and the resiliency to meet the challenges that
emerge in the 21st century and also to contribute to the transformation of
Sri Lanka into a developed country. In the current political discourse
within the party, the main policy standpoints and the directions have been
spelled out in President Kumaratunga’s statement titled ‘Vision for
the 21st Century’, and it is on the basis of this and the Resolutions of
14th National Conference that the policy projections have to be prepared. The party, as mentioned earlier, must strive hard to remain in its unique historical foundations, and it, as in history, should provide leadership to all progressive forces, irrespective of their size and levels of support, to bring about a transformation in the country and there by to preserve the unity, integrity and sovereignty of the Sri Lankan State, whose stability has now become a fundamental geo-political consideration for the stability of South Asia.
|
Today's Stories Tokyo Donors' Conference progress review next week
|
Contact
Information: Send mail to
Feature:
Sri Lanka Freedom Party in the politics of Sri Lanka